The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.4177 of 2024 Prasanta Kumar Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr.U.C.Mohanty, Advocate -versus- Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd and others …. Opposite Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr.B.K.Sharma, Sr.Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 28.02.2024 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.B.K.Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer: “ It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi calling upon the Opp.Paties to show cause as to why appropriate Writ/Writs shall not be allowed and if the Opp.Parties failed to show cause or show insufficient cause, the said Rule may be made absolute and on hearing the parties through their counsel and on calling for records this Hon’ble Court be further pleased to; i) Issue appropriate writ/writs in quashing the Office Letter No.XEA-5/2024-1239/WE/28 i.e. Tentative Gradation list of Asst. Engineer (Elect) working in // 2 // in W.A./Mo.2575/2023 OLIC Ltd holding the same as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and is a nullity being contrary to direction of this Hon’ble Court dated 19.04.2023 in W.P.(C) No.22887/2011 and dated 08.01.2024 and consequently quashed the promotion order No.1144 dated 07.02.2024 under Annexure-9 in the Grade of Executive Engineer (Elect) of the Opp.Party No.6 & 7 being violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. This Hon’ble Court be further pleased to pass such other appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders as would be deem fit and proper in favour of the Petitioner.” ii) 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner has initially joined as Junior Engineer (Elect.) under the Opposite Parties-Corporation on being appointed on 19.07.2000. Thereafter, the Petitioner pursuant to the decision of the Board of Directors in its 162th meeting and the recommendation of the Committee, Petitioner has been appointed as Assistant Engineer (Elect.). In the year 2017, the Opposite Party-Corporation adopted Restructuring of the Orissa Engineering Service Cadre vide Notification dated 29.07.2017 in compliance to the decision of the DoWR. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Petitioner was reverted back to his previous post vide order dated 19.08.2011 under Annexure-2 series. Challenging the order of reversion the Petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.22897 of 2011 and the said writ Petition was disposed of on 19.04.2023 setting aside the reversion order issued against the Petitioner. Against the order passed in the Writ Petition, a Writ Appeal bearing W.A.No.2575 of 2023 was preferred by the Opposite Party-Corporation and the said Writ Appeal was rejected vide order // 3 // dated 08.01.2024 under Annexure-6 to the Writ Petition. He further contended that a tentative gradation list was published on 08.02.2024 and in the tentative gradation list, the Petitioner has not been given due seniority and he has not been placed at the right position on the basis of seniority. The Petitioner has submitted an objection before the Opposite Party-corporation on 12.02.2024 under Annexure-10 to the Writ Petition. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that such objection of the Petitioner has not been considered by the Opposite Parties. He further contended that in the tentative gradation list published by the Opposite Party-Corporation, remarks has been given against the Petitioner in Sl.No.31 ( subject to final outcome of court cases). In reply to the aforesaid remarks/observation, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the case filed by the Petitioner has already been disposed of as per order dated 19.04.2023. As against that the Opposite Parties preferred an appeal baring WA.No.2575 of 2023 which has also been disposed of by the Division Bench vide order dated 08.02.2024. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the observation in the remarks column in the tentative gradation list is not correct. 5. Mr.B.K.Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation contended that the later development i.e. disposal of the case is not within the knowledge of the Opposite Parties He further contended that the Petitioner should have brought to the notice of the Opposite Parties instead of approaching this Court. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Corporation submitted that the Petitioner be permitted to approach the Opposite Party-Corporation with a further direction to the Corporation to consider the case of the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time in accordance with law. 6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels for the // 4 // respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts of the present case as well as the materials available on record, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stag of admission by granting liberty o the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Parties by filing a fresh representation along with copy of the order in the earlier litigation. In such event the Opposite Party- Corporation shall do well to consider the same and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. Further, while considering the case of the Petitioner, the Opposite Party-Corporation shall take into consideration the observation/direction given by this Court. It is further directed that the representation of the Petitioner shall be considered strictly in accordance with law and dispose of the same within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of the certified copy of this order. It is further directed that till a final decision is taken on the representation of the Petitioner, the gradation list in respect of the Petitioner’ cadre shall not be finalized. Final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such decision. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. RKS ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 05-Mar-2024 12:06:32